Monday, June 28, 2010

THESE ARE NOT THE DROIDS YOU'RE LOOKING FOR

It's reached epidemic proportions among the political press. It may even have affected a journalist you know.

For example, according to grand jury presentments, the House Republicans' alleged scheme to divert millions of dollars in taxpayer funds to political activity supposedly began just after the 2000 elections. The House Democrats' alleged plot to reward political volunteerism with taxpayer-funded bonuses supposedly kicked into gear during the 2004 election cycle.

But even though the Democrats' alleged illegal scheme was much smaller in scale and was initiated four years later, it's somehow portrayed as having given the Democratic candidates a wildly unfair advantage over Republican candidates.

Witness the Post-Gazette's hilariously melodramatic (and shockingly misleading) account of plucky underdog Jim Marshall, whose earnest supporters rolled meatballs and hand-addressed fund-raising letters from Marshall's home-based headquarters. Not a word did reporter Tracie Mauriello write - was she even aware? - of the blizzard of professionally-produced television ads, robo-calls and slick direct mail that swept through the district in the final weeks of the campaign, all funded through the state Republican committee.

Apparently Mauriello will believe anything she's told as long as it reflects poorly on Mike Veon. She didn't even bother to check Marshall's campaign finance reports, which reveal more than $150,000 in funding from the state party. And that's just the support that was legally reported. If Corbett's allegations against Perzel are true, a virtual army of taxpayer-funded House Republican staffers were using millions in taxpayer-funded resources to support Marshall and other Republican candidates.

If you want to try to set up a David vs. Goliath analogy, you kind of need someone to play the role of David, and there's no suitable candidate in this situation. It's not an "advantage" if both sides are cheating.

The Tribune-Review's Brad Bumsted chimes in, characterizing the bonus scheme - for which even he admits "Veon didn't write the script," as a direct result of Veon's "unquenched thirst for more power." Bumsted's been covering the legislature for a long time; he must know that when the bonus scheme which Veon didn't concoct was launched, the Democrats had virtually no power in the legislature. At that point, according to Corbett, the Democrats were being victimized by a multi-million-dollar taxpayer-funded Republican campaign blitzkrieg.

For that matter, Bumsted places responsibility for the scandal on Veon because Veon "signed off on it" as the "de facto leader of the House Democratic Caucus." But it was Bumsted himself who first revealed that the actual leader of the House Democratic Caucus - the only one who had the legal authority to disburse caucus funds - was well aware of the scheme. Yet somehow DeWeese never faced charges in connection with it, and Bumsted apparently has no problem with that?

How can you help combat cognitive dissonance among political reporters? Just a few seconds of critical thought a day could mean the difference between substantive analyzis and mindless rhetoric. Please, take the time to care.

84 comments:

Anonymous
said...

What's truly disturbing is when you see articles like this one:

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2010/06/pair_charged_with_assaulting_m.html An innocent man was severely beaten by two people for no apparent reason. They punched and kicked him repeatedly, while holding him at gun point. The gun, incidentally was unregistered.

The two involved in this violent act are free on bail. Clearly these people are a threat to society, yet they are released on bail. Mike Veon and Bret Cott, however, were taken straight to jail. I'm not suggesting Mike and Bret did nothing wrong, but this was a non violent offense, and they are not much (if any) threat to the safety of others.

ATTENTION BRAD BUMSTED: Tom Corbett did NOT "take out one of the Democrats' key warriors." The voters did that long before Corbett put Veon in his sights. Haven't you noticed that no "key" warriors in the legislature have been charged with anything?

The house Republicans and Bumsted's seasoned observer are missing the point - the destruction of checks and balances. If Corbett is elected he will appoint the attorney general. The legislature is going to have to enact everything Corbett wants or fear investigation and indictments. The power of the legislative branch of government to check and balance the executive branch will not exist in Pennsylvania. This is not what are founders envisioned.

The train the founders were riding on has long ago jumped the track. Even when boss rule and robber baron days were at their height there was decorum and honor. You find neither in the Courts, the Law or the Legislature. You have Tom Corbett in a political department of attorney General, a supreme court of that is ridden with political hacks and appointments and Corbett-Bush appointees like Mary Beth Buchanan, whom he sponsored in the beginning all bumbling around, marking time and adding to their public pensions, which businesses and taxpayers must worry how to keep a roof over their heads and feed their children. Shame on these hypocits. When November comes, let's throw the bums, out.

The train the founders were riding on has long ago jumped the track. Even when boss rule and robber baron days were at their height there was decorum and honor. You find neither in the Courts, the Law or the Legislature. You have Tom Corbett in a political department of attorney General, a supreme court of that is ridden with political hacks and appointments and Corbett-Bush appointees like Mary Beth Buchanan, whom he sponsored in the beginning all bumbling around, marking time and adding to their public pensions, which businesses and taxpayers must worry how to keep a roof over their heads and feed their children. Shame on these hypocits. When November comes, let's throw the bums, out.

Not to beat a dead horse, but since many of the comments on your last posting turned into a lambasting of Supreme Court Chief Justice Castille, and this one focuses on the lazy, lackluster follow-up of the mainstream media (that bastion of liberalism, as we are constantly reminded), I thought this was a timely refresher.

According to the Philly Inquirer's June 20, 2010 expose on the Philly family court building:

A longtime advocate for a new Family Court building, Newman then had the role of overseeing the city's courts.

At the time, Newman's son Jonathan worked at Obermayer, where he was "of counsel." Five months after she hired Rotwitt, Newman began dating the firm's chairman, Weinberg. She says her personal ties to the firm had nothing to do with her decision to hire Rotwitt."

And what has Madame Justice been up to lately? She was named Honorary Chairwoman of the Corbett for Governor campaign in 2009. More recently, On June 10, 2010, Tommy proudly announced that Newman would also be a co-chair of his "Statewide Women's Coalition."

After he continues to swap out "vital" AG personnel and snapping them over to his campaign team, in direct violation of his own grand jury's edict, he has surrounded himself with others who seem to be "conflicted", this just being one example.

And the hypocrite hits just keep on coming....

In the meantime, we certainly wouldn't want our "serious" media types who cover Harrisburg to ask their golden-boy candidate for governor the tough questions about his present relationships and what the future of PA will look like with such ties. No way; I think we should all quite content that the members of the press corps continue reliving the past and beating up on FORMER elected officials and staff.

No excuses, what was done was wrong and needs to be rectified. But how many times is the media going to tell us how bad these former people were, and ignore the dangers/corruption still among us?

Considering the frightening proposition of Governor Corbett, who then gets to name his successor as AG, here are some suggested questions for our friends in the press to ask, if you dare: General Tom, sir, what qualities will you consider most important in naming your replacement, should you be elected Governor? Will your selection process be open and transparent? Have you made any representations to any individuals so far that they will receive consideration? If so, who? Has anyone expressed an interest? Who? What involvement will you have, as Governor, in the continued operations of the indepedent office of AG? Will you demand that your successor keep his/her budget in line with your vision for decreased spending, which is something you have been unable to do as AG?

To our friends in the press (who may deny it, but they know they read this stuff), feel free to respond here, or in your articles.

The judge of course had the discretion to grant bail pending appeal - in the case of Annamarie Rosepink, he had no choice but to grant bail, given the length of her sentence. If they're eventually acquitted - as the AG clearly thinks they will be, or they'd have been granted bail - they'll never get that time back.

Anonymous said...The judge of course had the discretion to grant bail pending appeal - in the case of Annamarie Rosepink, he had no choice but to grant bail, given the length of her sentence. If they're eventually acquitted - as the AG clearly thinks they will be, or they'd have been granted bail - they'll never get that time back. June 29, 2010 6:16 PM

Mary beth Buchanan own actions of ambition over justice has come back to haunt her and one can say her career for higher office, or a Judgeship, or a high appointment is over.

Marybeth may herself be investigated and in any event, the DOJ has had to change their Travel Policy due to her abuses.

Consequently, AG Corbett and his Runaway Abusive Prosecutor along with Judge Lewis complicity, will not be forgotten, and will suffer a worse fate not just by their careers but also by their conscious once it happens to some of them.

Look, I wish this kind of haunting upon no one, all I know is if, AG Corbett had investigated all 4 Caucuses fairly and evenly with balance and understanding Corbett's own campaign has had similar trouble, well then we would have a fair resolution to abuses, sloppy procedures, and unfair advantages that needed to be reformed and stopped.

BUT, BUT, BUT this did not happen and it was intentional in every political way, not the true justice way, and some Prosecutors and Staffers at OAG know it.

That is not right, and what is happening to Mike and Brett is not right either.

Republicans House and Senate members are just as guilty, but Republican AG Corbett has given them a pass, in the name of deterrence, revenge, and political ambitions.

AG Corbett has done nothing Noble for anyone except his Campaign for Governor. This is the kind of Karma that catches up with you in many ways. Whether you are later investigated, prosecuted, or exposed as corrupt.

Alternatively, heart conditions, diabetes, and other diseases come upon you.

This is what happens when you claim you are doing justice but did so in methods and selective ways that were based on anything but justice.

Finally, when you lie about, cheat at trial, and have a Judge doing the same thing, it will come back upon you and your children, eventually.

This is why you must always do the right thing when you are a US Attorney, Attorney General, or Prosecutor.

When you do not you rob our system of government of its justice, and you should be ashamed!

Anonymous 8:21 PMsaid...Look, I wish this kind of haunting upon no one, all I know is if, AG Corbett had investigated all 4 Caucuses fairly and evenly with balance and understanding Corbett's own campaign has had similar trouble, well then we would have a fair resolution to abuses, sloppy procedures, and unfair advantages that needed to be reformed and stopped. BUT, BUT, BUT this did not happen and it was intentional in every political way, not the true justice way, and some Prosecutors and Staffers at OAG know it. That is not right, and what is happening to Mike and Brett is not right either.

You are right, when Former State Senate Staffers, Mike Long and Brian Nutt are under investigation by the Office of Attorney General how can they be working on the Attorney General Campaign?

How can the Prosecutors go along with this kind of Conflict of Interests and say they are honest and defending the Taxpayers?

How can they say they are following the evidence and investigating the Senate Caucuses?

To anonymous june 29 5:48 pm, BAIL FOR WHAT? Requesting an appeal for bail and the appeal process is simply excercising a persons rights according to our justice system!!Mr. Veon has every right to do this.

What is NOT justice is AG Corbett picking and choosing WHO he was to charge with 'illegal' activity! AND conducting his campaign in the same manner he has charged others.!!

Will someone clarify this - Did Mike Veon break the law? Yes or no - and please no reasoning, just yes or no.Was he caught and charged with the correct charges?Then why defend him? Because the outcome justifies the means? Who gets to pick the value of the outcome? I mean, who thinks they know what is right for everyone living in the state of PA, other than Mike Veon?That is what is so frustrating about all of this. You don't know what the people want, you only know what you want. Mike was busted and now he's got to pay some price or there is something very wrong with the whole system.

Did you know in 2006, the voters of the 14th district living in Chippewa Township turned out at 100%? Does anyone think this GOTV was run out of Jim Marshall's living room? Everyone in the 14th knows Perzel came in with a last minute blitz based on the voter data used for redistricting for phone calls, mailers and the like.

State Supreme Court Justice Joan Orie Melvin will be the subject of a new Allegheny County grand jury investigation, the attorney for her sister and former administrative assistant charged in another case said today.

James DePasquale, who represents Janine Orie, said he learned the information two weeks ago.

"It was my understanding the purpose of the grand jury was to look at Justice [Joan Orie] Melvin's conduct," he said.

Because of the detailed information contained in the grand jury presentment returned for Janine Orie and another sister, state Sen. Jane Orie, R-McCandless, Mr. DePasquale said he wasn't surprised.

Janine and Jane Orie were charged in April. Jane Orie faces 10 counts, including theft of services, tampering with evidence, conspiracy and violating the state ethics act.

Janine Orie, who is on leave from her job as a chief administrative judicial assistant for Justice Melvin, is charged with conspiracy and theft of services.

The charges stem from allegedly using state employees and equipment to run Justice Melvin's political campaign and trying to hide evidence about that effort.

Mr. DePasquale said he hopes to have the charges against his client dismissed at next month's preliminary hearing.

"I know defense attorneys say this all the time -- that they don't know why their clients were indicted, but the truth of the matter is, I don't know why she was indicted," Mr. DePasquale said. "I'm very confident, at this point, she's going to be found not guilty."

A reputed mob boss from northeastern Pennsylvania has gotten nearly two years knocked off his federal prison sentence after providing "substantial assistance" in an investigation of a casino owner.

William D'Elia pleaded guilty in 2008 to witness tampering and conspiracy to launder drug money. Judge Thomas Vanaskie on Wednesday reduced D'Elia's sentence by 21 months, to 87 months. The reduction was recommended by prosecutors.

Mount Airy Casino Resort owner Louis DeNaples was charged in 2008 with lying about his relationship with D'Elia to state gambling regulators. DeNaples agreed to transfer ownership of the casino to his daughter as part of a deal with a county prosecutor to drop the case.

Anonymous June 30, 2010 1:24 PM said...Will someone clarify this - Did Mike Veon break the law? Yes or no - and please no reasoning, just yes or no.MY RESPONSE:NO, THE DEFENDANTS RIGHTS HAVE BEEN CONSTITUTIONALLY VIOLATED AND VEON NEVER INTENDED TO VIOLATE ANY LAWS.

Anonymous June 30, 2010 1:24 PM said...Was he caught and charged with the correct charges?MY RESPONSE:NO, IT IS CLEAR FROM 84% OF THE CHARGES BEING FOUND NOT GUILTY AND ANOTHER 9 MAY BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACCORDING TO SUPREME COURT DECISION, AND THE OAG VIOLATED THEIR OWN ETHICS, GUIDELINES AND LAWS IN THE MANNER THEY HANDLE THE GRAND JURY AND JUDGES RULINGS ON UNAUTHENTICATED EMAILS, REPLACEMENT OF A JURORS, NOT CONTROLLING JURY MOVEMENTS WITHIN HIS OWN RULES, AND ESPECIALLY THE SENTENCING, ALL ARE SUBJECT TO APPEAL

Anonymous June 30, 2010 1:24 PM said...Then why defend him? Because the outcome justifies the means? MY RESPONSE:THE ENDS JUSTIFY THE MEANS IS A PHILOSOPHY FROM PLATO USED BY COMMUNISTS, FASCISTS, AND DICTATORS SOCIETIES TO PERSECUTE PEOPLE THEY DO NOT LIKE POLITICALLY. OUR SOCIETY USES ARISTOTLE INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM PROTECTIONS AND PREFER MANY CRIMINALS GO FREE RATHER PERSECUTE ONE INNOCENCE MAN.

Anonymous June 30, 2010 1:24 PM said...Who gets to pick the value of the outcome? I mean, who thinks they know what is right for everyone living in the state of PA, other than Mike Veon?MY RESPONSE:APPEAL COURTS FOR ONE, FAIR-MINDED PEOPLE FOR TWO, AND SUPPOSEDLY, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS LIKE THE JUDICIAL CONDUCT BOARD AND THE BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND DISCIPLINE, AND ETHICS COMMISSION.PUBLIC OPINION TOO AND VOTER DID VOTER OUT VEON BUT HE WAS PROSECUTED ANYWAY. UNLIKE SENATORS LAVALLE, JUBELIRER, AND BRIGHTBILL.

Anonymous June 30, 2010 1:24 PM said...That is what is so frustrating about all of this. You don't know what the people want, you only know what you want. MY RESPONSE:NO, WE DO KNOW WHAT AG CORBETT WANTS AND THAT TO BE GOVERNOR NO MATTER HOW MANY LAWS HE BREAKS ON HIS OWN CAMPAIGN.

Anonymous June 30, 2010 1:24 PM said...Mike was busted and now he's got to pay some price or there is something very wrong with the whole system.MY RESPONSE:MIKE IS FINE WITH THAT COMMENT, BUT WHAT WE FIND UNFAIR AND CORRUPT IS THE REPUBLICAN AG CORBETT WILL NOT INVESTIGATE REPUBLICAN SENATORS, REPUBLICAN JUDGES, AND REPUBLICAN STAFFERS THAT HAVE BEEN HIRED BY THE AG BUT DID THE SAME THING?

NOW THAT IS TRUE CORRUPTION BY PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPOSE TO UPHOLD ALL LAWS EQUALLY AND NOT LET THEIR FRIENDS AND POLITICAL CONTRIBUTORS GO!

FINALLY ONE LAST QUOTE FROM A DEFENSE LAWYER OF A REPUBLICAN JUDGE THAT AG CORBETT REFUSED TO INVESTIGATE:

"I know defense attorneys say this all the time -- that they don't know why their clients were indicted, but the truth of the matter is, I don't know why she was indicted," Mr. DePasquale said. "I'm very confident, at this point, she's going to be found not guilty."

Anonymous June 30, 2010 1:24 PM said...Will someone clarify this - Did Mike Veon break the law? Yes or no - and please no reasoning, just yes or no.MY RESPONSE:NO, THE DEFENDANTS RIGHTS HAVE BEEN CONSTITUTIONALLY VIOLATED AND VEON NEVER INTENDED TO VIOLATE ANY LAWS.

Anonymous June 30, 2010 1:24 PM said...Was he caught and charged with the correct charges?MY RESPONSE:NO, IT IS CLEAR FROM 84% OF THE CHARGES BEING FOUND NOT GUILTY AND ANOTHER 9 MAY BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACCORDING TO SUPREME COURT DECISION, AND THE OAG VIOLATED THEIR OWN ETHICS, GUIDELINES AND LAWS IN THE MANNER THEY HANDLE THE GRAND JURY AND JUDGES RULINGS ON UNAUTHENTICATED EMAILS, REPLACEMENT OF A JURORS, NOT CONTROLLING JURY MOVEMENTS WITHIN HIS OWN RULES, AND ESPECIALLY THE SENTENCING, ALL ARE SUBJECT TO APPEAL

Anonymous June 30, 2010 1:24 PM said...Then why defend him? Because the outcome justifies the means? MY RESPONSE:THE ENDS JUSTIFY THE MEANS IS A PHILOSOPHY FROM PLATO USED BY COMMUNISTS, FASCISTS, AND DICTATORS SOCIETIES TO PERSECUTE PEOPLE THEY DO NOT LIKE POLITICALLY. OUR SOCIETY USES ARISTOTLE INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM PROTECTIONS AND PREFER MANY CRIMINALS GO FREE RATHER PERSECUTE ONE INNOCENCE MAN.

Anonymous June 30, 2010 1:24 PM said...Who gets to pick the value of the outcome? I mean, who thinks they know what is right for everyone living in the state of PA, other than Mike Veon?MY RESPONSE:APPEAL COURTS FOR ONE, FAIR-MINDED PEOPLE FOR TWO, AND SUPPOSEDLY, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS LIKE THE JUDICIAL CONDUCT BOARD AND THE BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND DISCIPLINE, AND ETHICS COMMISSION.PUBLIC OPINION TOO AND VOTER DID VOTER OUT VEON BUT HE WAS PROSECUTED ANYWAY. UNLIKE SENATORS LAVALLE, JUBELIRER, AND BRIGHTBILL.

Anonymous June 30, 2010 1:24 PM said...That is what is so frustrating about all of this. You don't know what the people want, you only know what you want. MY RESPONSE:NO, WE DO KNOW WHAT AG CORBETT WANTS AND THAT TO BE GOVERNOR NO MATTER HOW MANY LAWS HE BREAKS ON HIS OWN CAMPAIGN.

Anonymous June 30, 2010 1:24 PM said...Mike was busted and now he's got to pay some price or there is something very wrong with the whole system.MY RESPONSE:MIKE IS FINE WITH THAT COMMENT, BUT WHAT WE FIND UNFAIR AND CORRUPT IS THE REPUBLICAN AG CORBETT WILL NOT INVESTIGATE REPUBLICAN SENATORS, REPUBLICAN JUDGES, AND REPUBLICAN STAFFERS THAT HAVE BEEN HIRED BY THE AG BUT DID THE SAME THING?

NOW THAT IS TRUE CORRUPTION BY PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPOSE TO UPHOLD ALL LAWS EQUALLY AND NOT LET THEIR FRIENDS AND POLITICAL CONTRIBUTORS GO!

FINALLY ONE LAST QUOTE FROM A DEFENSE LAWYER OF A REPUBLICAN JUDGE THAT AG CORBETT REFUSED TO INVESTIGATE:

"I know defense attorneys say this all the time -- that they don't know why their clients were indicted, but the truth of the matter is, I don't know why she was indicted," Mr. DePasquale said. "I'm very confident, at this point, she's going to be found not guilty."

Anonymous 1:11 PM said...Tommy's Truisms:If you sling enough mud, some of it is bound to stick. This is also known as the 16% rule. You can't sling mud, without getting some on you. A/K/A: the Perzel Doctrine July 1, 2010 1:11 PM

AG Tommy's Lies:

We go where the evidence take us!

AG Tommy Truisms:

We do not follow the evidence if it takes us to Republican Senators and Republican Judges!

In more than 15% of cases of wrongful conviction overturned by DNA testing, an informant or jailhouse snitch testified against the defendant.

Often, statements from people with incentives to testify – particularly incentives that are not disclosed to the jury – are the central evidence in convicting an innocent person.

People have been wrongfully convicted in cases in which snitches:

•Have been paid to testify

•Have testified in exchange for their release from prison.

•Have testified in multiple distinct cases that they have evidence of guilt, through overhearing a confession or witnessing the crime.

DNA exonerations have shown that snitches lie on the stand. To many, this news isn’t a surprise. Testifying falsely in exchange for an incentive – either money or a sentence reduction – is often the last resort for a desperate inmate.

For someone who is not in prison already, but who wants to avoid being charged with a crime, providing snitch testimony may be the only option.

Watch a video of Michigan exoneree Ken Wyniemko describing how the testimony of an incentivized informant led to his wrongful conviction.

In some cases, snitches or informants come forward voluntarily, often seeking deals or special treatment.

But sometimes law enforcement officials seek out snitches and give them extensive background on cases — essentially feeding them the information they need to provide false testimony.

Snitches continue to testify in courtrooms around the country today.

In some cases without biological evidence, the snitch testimony is the only evidence of guilt.

Vital reforms are needed to ensure that these unreliable witnesses are not given undue weight by juries.

Landmark Study:In 2005, the Center on Wrongful Convictions in Chicago issued a report,

"The Snitch System: How Incentivized Witnesses Put 38 Innocent Americans on Death Row."

The study provides a comprehensive look at the problem of snitch testimony, and describes in detail how the use of snitch testimony contributed to the conviction of specific innocent defendants.

1. An investigation by the F.B.I. into all cases where there is a chance that evidence was tampered with, fabricated and\or concealed in order to convict the innocent person for political reasons or to augment a campaign for higher office.

2. Investigation into cases where collusion between the police, prosecutors, defense attorneys and/or judges in order to convict a person who is or maybe innocent.

3. Legislation to make these cases (items 1 and 2) Federal Crimes with suggested sentences that will make the perpetrators of these crimes serve as much or more time in prison and those who they had wrongfully convicted.

4. Upon the presentation of evidence and determination that a wrongful conviction may have occurred and new trial will be carried out in the Federal courts if the case was originally on the state or a different Federal judge and prosecutor if it was a Federal case and those who were involved will be investigated and prosecuted.

5. The wrongfully convicted person shall be allowed to sue the parties involved, including the Government agency, for wrongful prosecution and for monetary damages to be determined by a jury, including attorney’s fees, loss of income and mental anguish.

These wrongful convictions are a not only a miscarriage of justice but also a disgrace to our American Justice System.

There is a lot of money made from the corruption in our justice system and our prison system.

A full scale investigation of the system is not only warranted but it is imperative to make the system truly a justice system instead of an injustice system.

The older Marxist view that justice is a function of the size of the pocketbook— the rich get it and the poor do not—has no credibility in our time of asset freezes and prosecutors in search of high-profile cases.

Blackstone conceived of law as the people’s shield. It is better, he said, for ten guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to be convicted.

Wrongful conviction is on the rise because the protections against it have been eroded by the pursuit of devils—drug dealers, child molesters, environmental polluters, white-collar criminals, and terrorists—all of whom must be rounded up at all cost.

In doing so, we have done what Sir Thomas More warns against in the play A Man for All Seasons: we have cut a great swath in the law.

Blackstone called the legal principles that made the law a shield “the Rights of Englishmen.”

These rights include due process, the attorney-client privilege, equality before the law, the right to confront adverse witnesses, and the prohibitions against crimes without intent, bills of attainder, self-incrimination, retroactive law, and attacks against a person through his property.

Each of these principles has been breached.

Today prosecutors create bills of attainder by tailoring novel interpretations of law to fit the targeted defendant.

The emergence of moral causes or ends that justify the means, such as “saving our children from drugs” and “making environmental polluters pay,” has contributed greatly to the breakdown of prosecutorial restraint.

Today a prosecutor who gives the defendant the benefit of the doubt is regarded as a failure.

In 1998, former deputy U.S. attorney general Arnold I. Burns wrote in the Wall Street Journal that “it is time for a sober reassessment of the power we have concentrated in the hands of prosecutors and the alarming absence of effective checks and balances to prevent the widespread abuse of that power” (A23).

A law school textbook, Prosecutorial Misconduct, now in its second edition (Gershman 1991), is evidence that the problem is not going away on its own.

Honest prosecutors have the same interest as defendants in the integrity of the criminal justice system.

It is in their interest that withholding exculpatory evidence not become routine and that suborned perjury not become the only evidence in a case.

Juries alone are not a deterrent.

Juries are often unaware that the witness giving incriminating testimony not only has been rehearsed in the role but also has been paid by the prosecutor with money or reduced prison time or dropped charges.

A new practice known as “jumping on the bus” has taken the prosecutorial ethic to the rock-bottom depth.

Informants sand Immunity Witnesses sell and fabricate information on unsolved cases or upcoming cases to an immunity witness, or prosecutors and federal agents feed this material to an immunity witness.

The immunity witness memorizes the case, thereby seeming to have inside knowledge when he comes forward with information to trade in exchange for a reduced sentence.

In the absence of evidence, this practice is used sometimes against a person only believed to be guilty.

Sometimes it is used to close unsolved cases, and sometimes it occurs at an immunity witness’s initiative to gte back at other people.

Formerly, self-serving accusations by criminals were treated only as leads to be investigated.

If the leads proved helpful, evidence still had to be marshaled.

Today the accusation is the evidence.

Thus, the criminal element itself has a big say in who goes to prison because of lazy and sloppy prosecutors' practices.

What is now happening is a circularity of reasoning justifies plea bargaining.

Without plea bargaining, the argument goes, the courts would not be able to handle the caseload.

This argument is unconvincing.

The obvious solution is to create enough courts to handle the case-load or to reduce the caseload by eliminating victimless crimes, such as drug possession and trumped-up charges based on regulatory interpretation or political prosecutions for political party gains.

Every law, regulation, or reform has unintended consequences.

A case can be made that the exclusionary rule changed the culture of the criminal justice system and led to the coerced plea bargain.

By releasing criminals known to be guilty, the exclusionary rule turned the criminal justice system into a lottery for police, prosecutors, and criminals alike.

The result was demoralized prosecutors who began to see in the plea bargain a way to game the system back toward conviction.

The unintended consequence of the exclusionary rule was cultural change.

The criminal justice system deemphasized pursuit of the truth and focused on convicting the defendant.

Once we understand that the law has been lost, it is easy to understand why there are innocents in prison.

As important as it is to get these innocents out of prison, new victims of the system can be put there faster than innocence projects can rescue them.

Moreover, the preoccupation with immunity witnesses evidence can resolve the doubt about innocence leaves the vast majority of wrongfully convicted persons without a prayer.

To make a dent in wrongful conviction, we must rethink the approach.

Innocence projects and law professors who find injustice a burden on the conscience can work to reestablish the inculcation of the ethic in law school,

an ethic so well expressed by George Sutherland (Berger v. U.S. 1935) and Robert Jackson (1940):

that the prosecutor’s duty is to see that justice is done, not to win convictions.

If the law schools can be carried, so can the bar association and the journalism schools.

Stories about wrongful prosecution should become a media priority.

Law schools must deal as well with the Benthamite influences that have eroded the “Rights of Englishmen” and have made law a weapon in the hands of government.

If Benthamite collectivism, aided by deconstructionism and cultural Marxism, has undermined the legal principles that protect individuals from government power, nothing can be done about wrongful conviction until the Blackstonian principles are restored.

Progress against wrongful conviction also requires a return to constitutionalism.

To many lawyers, “constitutional protection” means the granting of protected minority status by a federal judge.

A prosecutor’s conviction rate is more important than a fair trial and that justice plays second fiddle to clearing the court docket.

It is often said that Americans live under the rule of law.

It is closer to the truth to say that Americans live under the rule of regulators.

Theodore Lowi (1979) has argued that accountable law in the United States ceased seventy years ago with the delegation of law-making power to the executive branch in violation of the principle that a delegated power cannot itself be delegated.

The people delegated law-making power to Congress, where under our system of government it must reside forever.

First, however, law must be put back in the hands of Congress, an unlikely event when government is so large that it involves itself in every aspect of life.

It is just as unlikely that trials will take the place of plea bargains as long as so many laws create so many crimes, and so few resources are devoted to courts and trials.

The problem of wrongful conviction is much larger than many of its antagonists appreciate.

We will spin our wheels expending vast energies in freeing a few innocent people, and we must do what we can.

But we also must gird for battle and restore the lost law.

Once the “Rights of Englishmen” are no longer even a memory, justice will be gone as well.

How many prosecutors ever face criminal prosecution for misconduct? The Department of Justice would clearly have this data. Other than Mike Nifong, has any prosecutor in recent memory been prosecuted for misconduct? What about "professional disciplinary proceedings"?

At least unethical prosecutors, according to DOJ, get disbarred or fired. That, too, is a false claim.

In a lengthy post, I showed that the Department of Justice does not punish prosecutorial misconduct. Unethical state prosecutors similarity escape punishment.

Calling former Santa Clara County prosecutor Ben Field’s ethical misconduct “inexcusable,” a State Bar appeals panel has upheld a judge’s landmark recommendation that he be suspended from practicing law for four years.

The panel’s decision increases the chances Field will undergo the harshest disciplinary punishment in recent history for a California prosecutor. Field’s attorney, Allen Ruby, said he will appeal the decision to the state Supreme Court. But appeals to the high court are discretionary — meaning the court can decide not to hear the matter.

Field resigned from the district attorney’s office in August after a State Bar judge found he violated a host of ethical rules in four criminal cases, ranging from disobeying judges’ orders to hiding crucial evidence from defense lawyers that could have helped people accused of crimes. He now works for former San Jose City Councilwoman Cindy Chavez at the South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council and its nonprofit arm.

In the decision filed Friday, the appellate panel found after its own extensive investigation that Field’s misconduct harmed the reputation of the district attorney’s office and the public trust in the criminal justice system.

“Field’s misconduct began shortly after his admission to the bar, involved moral turpitude, spanned a 10-year period and significantly affected the criminal justice system,” the appellate panel’s 31-page report says. “We find that Field’s misconduct

was inexcusable.”

Field declined Tuesday to comment.

The panel found Field violated court orders in a 1995 juvenile case and defied a judge’s orders and concealed evidence in the 2003 appeal of a rape case. It also found that he withheld a crucial witness’s police interrogation in a 2003 murder case and defied court orders in his closing arguments in a 2005 sex offender case.

Before the decision, there was speculation in the legal community that the panel would impose an even harsher punishment than the State Bar judge. But the panel found three reasons to stick with the judge’s recommendation — Field’s cooperation during the investigation, his previous pro bono service and testimonials by 36 character witnesses, including former District Attorney George Kennedy and retired Judge Ronald Lisk. Current District Attorney Dolores Carr also vouched for Field’s honesty and integrity but conceded he failed to meet the office’s overall ethical standards.

A spokesman for Carr said Tuesday she declined to comment. The State Bar also declined to comment, beyond noting that “Two State Bar courts have now spoken.”

Court accepted cert today in Pottawattamie County v. McGhee, 08-1065, an Iowa case in which two men wrongfully convicted of murder sued the prosecutors.

Curtis W. McGhee Jr., and Terry Harrington served 25 years of a life sentence for killing a retired police officer before being freed when it turned out prosecutors had withheld evidence about another suspect and presented false testimony from witnesses.

[Prosecutors]Richter and Hrvol argued that they were immune from lawsuits because they were acting within the scope of their job. Federal courts, however, rejected their motions to dismiss the lawsuits, saying the immunity did not extend to them.

The lower courts found immunity on the withholding evidence claim but said the prosecutors can be sued for procuring false testimony during the investigation and using it against the defendants at trial.

Yesterday a settlement ended Pottawattamie County v. McGhee, a Supreme Court case that raised the question of when prosecutors can be held personally liable for misconduct they commit while accumulating evidence against a defendant.

Terry Harrington and Curtis W. McGhee, who served 25 years for the 1978 murder of a retired police officer before being released, sued Dave Richter and Joseph Hrvol, the Pottawattamie County, Iowa, prosecutors who sent them to prison, accusing them of fabricating evidence, coercing witnesses, and hiding exculpatory evidence.

The issue before the Court, which heard the case in November, was whether Richter and Hrvol committed these abuses in their roles as prosecutors, in which case longstanding precedent would make them immune from lawsuits, or in their roles as investigators, in which case they could be held personally liable.

The $12 million settlement by the prosecutors and the county suggests they feared the Court would reach the latter conclusion.

Pottawattamie County v. McGhee, the biggest case on prosecutorial immunity in years, has been dismissed by agreement.

UPDATE:

The settlement was for $12 million.

Thanks to the damned justiciability doctrines, the Court won't decide the issue.

The lead plaintiff in Pottawattamie County was represented by Gerry Spence's law firm.

On a personal level, at least the plaintiff is going to get a fat check for the decades he spent behind bars.

Professionally and scholarly speaking, the dismissal is demoralizing.

As a citizen, it's even more demoralizing to reflect on the fact that the prosecutors who knowingly had an innocent man convicted are still practicing law.

The prosecutors were never punished.

The unethical prosecutors won't even write any checks, as taxpayers will foot the bill.

But at least the plaintiff is going to get paid.

ADVICE TO VEON AND COTT TIME TO HIRE GERRY SPENCE FOR HIS INVESTIGATION OF THE OAG AND THEIR PROSECUTORS FOR AN APPEAL!

Lawyers & Advocates for Wyoming's mission is to provide quality legal representation in defense and promotion of the public's interest on substantive issues of health, safety, consumer rights, and civil liberties to Wyoming citizens.

It is further the purpose of Lawyers and Advocates for Wyoming to train and educate persons engaged in the practice of law and to encourage social betterment through the legal profession. BackgroundLawyers & Advocates for Wyoming or L.A.W. was started in 1991.

It was Gerry Spence's dream to create a law firm that was devoted solely to Wyoming's public interest.

He wanted a law firm that would always fight for Wyoming's people and important Wyoming causes—even if those cases did not generate an economic value for the law firm.

Based on this dream, he and his partners at Spence, Moriarity and Schuster, L.L.C. started L.A.W.

L.A.W. is not-for-profit.

It strives to support itself by re-investing fees earned from cases into the firm and using the money to fund future cases.

The firm's sole employee is a Director who is selected by the Board of Directors. (The Board is made up of the members of the law firm of Spence, Moriarity and Schuster, L.L.C.).

The Director is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the firm and the day-to-day management of all cases assigned to L.A.W. For each case that is handled by L.A.W., one or more Board members are assigned to assist and advise the Director in that particular case.

The Board members do not receive fees for the work they perform on L.A.W.'s cases—all of their time is donated. L.A.W. simply would not be successful without the hours of work that the Board contributes to L.A.W., and the guidance they provide the Director.

This firm also takes cases outside the state of Wyoming if they have social appeal and are seen to advance the betterment of justice.

The king disguises itself as our democratic government. But it lies to us and betrays us. The king owns our minds.

We are the new slaves, enslaved by the king’s propaganda and lies.

We are told we are free. But money controls all, and the people have little.

The money I speak of buys elections and lying politicians who are the minions of the Corporate King.

The Supreme Court, itself owned by the Corporate King, has just delivered our country over to the power of money with the court’s latest decision in which it proclaims that the king may spend whatever the king wishes to further enslave the people, by feeding the people lies, feeding their prejudices, feeding their fear, feeding their hatreds and suspicions and claiming it is all for their benefit and their freedom.

We are the new slaves, enslaved by the king’s voice, the television that educates us and our children, that corrupts our values with violence, that dumbs us down so we can no longer think for ourselves.

We turn to the tube to think for us. It tells us what gadgets, what things to buy and how to become further enslaved to pay for them.

We once enslaved the aborigines in this country by trading them trinkets and mirrors in exchange for their land.

It is an old trick that those in power play on the powerless.

We are the powerless.

We are the new slaves. We are enslaved by banks and their demand for interest. The banks own our homes. We pay the banks rent in the form of interest, and we keep up their property at our expense.

The banks are the soul of the Corporate King.

But king is governed by no moral code. The king is governed only by its greed.

We are the new slaves. We pay tribute to the Corporate King from the sweat of our bodies to finance the king’s wars, wars not for our benefit, but for the king’s further enrichment and power.

Our people die in such wars. Our people die without adequate health care. Millions of our children go to bed at night hungry and uneducated. The king does not care. It cares only for its wars and its profit.

The king sits back and laughs.

To control the minds of hundreds of millions of people is divine.

But such power is in the hands of fools who are the collective mind of the Corporate King. That mind is terminally diseased with greed.

And the people are in jeopardy, for the king will continue to betray the people and lie to the people until it has sucked out the last of our lives. The Corporate King is insane.

What shall a desperate people do?

We will do nothing until we learn the truth of our slavery. Will it then be too late except to scream in the streets?

Yesterday a settlement ended Pottawattamie County v. McGhee, a Supreme Court case that raised the question of when prosecutors can be held personally liable for misconduct they commit while accumulating evidence against a defendant.

Terry Harrington and Curtis W. McGhee, who served 25 years for the 1978 murder of a retired police officer before being released, sued Dave Richter and Joseph Hrvol, the Pottawattamie County, Iowa, prosecutors who sent them to prison, accusing them of fabricating evidence, coercing witnesses, and hiding exculpatory evidence. The issue before the Court, which heard the case in November, was whether Richter and Hrvol committed these abuses in their roles as prosecutors, in which case longstanding precedent would make them immune from lawsuits, or in their roles as investigators, in which case they could be held personally liable.

The $12 million settlement by the prosecutors and the county suggests they feared the Court would reach the latter conclusion.

Pottawattamie County v. McGhee, the biggest case on prosecutorial immunity in years, has been dismissed by agreement. Details here. UPDATE: The settlement was for $12 million. Thanks to the damned justiciability doctrines, the Court won't decide the issue. The lead plaintiff in Pottawattamie County was represented by Gerry Spence's law firm. On a personal level, at least the plaintiff is going to get a fat check for the decades he spent behind bars.

Professionally and scholarly speaking, the dismissal is demoralizing. As a citizen, it's even more demoralizing to reflect on the fact that the prosecutors who knowingly had an innocent man convicted are still practicing law. The prosecutors were never punished. The unethical prosecutors won't even write any checks, as taxpayers will foot the bill.

In the 1960s, I had faith people would become smarter and so our democracy would become stronger.

The opposite has happened. After 35 years of employment, working with top management of a worldwide corporation.

I saw first hand how corporate values are able to seap through corporate marble walls and hardwire changes to citizen’s brains that insures enough protesting arms will never be raised to reverse the fall of our democracy.

I am sorry and appoligize to my Grandchildren for all the reasons I’d rather keep my life of 71 years than exchange it and be 17 years old again.

Expect trouble as an inevitable part of life and repeat to yourself, the most true and comforting words of all; This, too, shall passssss as gas in the hour glass burning bright from the methane made from a poor diet caused by stress within due to be targeted from without.

Maybe this is a good time to apologize and give the country back to the Indians.

The disease is systemic, there is nothing new here. Greed, envy, coveteousness, pursuit of political power etc. these exsist in the individual too varying degrees and express themselves in the body social.

They are only as corrupt as we, lacking today’s technology, have allowed them to be. Turn off those cable “news” television sets, America!

We can all look in the mirror and ask ourselves how am I no different than the one I condemn?

Every moment in our lives we have an opportunity to change our destiny, our nation and the world when we honor and respect ourselves and one another.

Please consider Articles of Freedom, submitted by WE THE PEOPLE to confront elected corrupt Attorney Generals.

Much as Magna Charta barons confronted the King, for the rights of the people, on the Captiol grounds of states across America on the Anniversary of the American Revolution.

The reason why Corbett has refused to investigate the 30 Republican Senators is that if just 6 are caught campaigning on state time as Veon was accused and convicted.

It would change the balance in the Senate from 30 Republican Majority to a 26 Democratic Majority.

Corbett is misusing his office by not investigating Republican Senators for the same crimes Corbett convicted Veon on so as not to endanger the Republican Majority if Corbett becomes Governor.

Newspapers Reporters cannot figure this out to date and never ask Corbett why he hired Senate Bonusgate Staffers instead of investigating them?

Onorato needs to nail Corbett on this at the debates.

The Newspapers need to ask Corbett everyday about it, until he produces Republican Senators Indictements and fires Former Republican Senate Staffers Corbett hired for his campaign to prove his investigation is fair and honest?

Anonymous said...Holy shit you guys have bugged out. It is time to lay off the wine your cellmate is makes in the toilet. July 1, 2010 10:08 PM

Don't worry Gerry Spence is coming and after he investigates every OAG prosecutor for misconduct, a nice million dollar settlement or Supreme Court ruling will put these Prosecutors in the toilet so you can piss on them for their misdeeds!

Walmart CEO Pay: More in an Hour Than Workers Get All Year?Walmart Executive-Worker Pay Gap Stirkes Chord in Chicago and Beyond:

By Ed Smith's math, the CEO of Walmart earns more in an hour than his employees will earn in a year.

Smith, an alderman in Chicago, presented posters at a city council meeting showing that Walmart CEO Michael Duke's $35 million salary, when converted to an hourly wage, worked out to $16,826.92. By comparison, at a Walmart store planned for the Windy City's Pullman neighborhood, new employees to be paid $8.75 an hour would gross $13,650 a year.

A study last fall by the Institute for Policy Studies, a liberal Washington D.C. research group, found that CEOs in the country's S&P 500 companies make, on average, 319 times more than the average American worker.

The disputed election for the 180th District state House seat has at least five more weeks of fighting.

State Rep. Angel Cruz asked a court this week to force the Philadelphia City Commission to certify him as the winner of the May 18 primary election and to toss a challenge filed by his opponent, Jonathan Ramos.

A Court of Common Pleas judge yesterday declined to give Cruz an emergency hearing on his requests. The case will have to wait until an Aug. 9 hearing.

Ramos claims the 7th Democratic Ward, which Cruz leads, was home to many Election Day improprieties that impacted the final results. Cruz says those claims are bunk and the challenge Ramos filed is flawed.

The state Attorney General's Office is investigating, watch how this investigation will be resolved in months not like the years it is taking for the citizens to hear of Republican Senators working on campaign on state time after 4 long years.

So is the City Commission, though with limited success. The Commission subpoenaed 137 poll workers for hearings this week but only 51 of them showed up.

Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Corbett said Wednesday he had no plans to comply with a request by an environmental group to return a $3,000 campaign contribution he received May 13 from a part-owner of the deepwater well that is billowing oil into the Gulf of Mexico.

Conservation Voters of Pennsylvania, an affiliate of the national League of Conservation Voters, asked last week that Corbett refuse any money from Anadarko Petroleum until the Texas company contributed to the cost of the cleanup.

The company owns one-quarter of the well but has said that BP, as the well operator, is wholly responsible for the cleanup.

Anadarko, which also drills for natural gas, won a $120 million no-bid contract from the Rendell administration on May 11 to develop gas wells on 33,000 acres of public land in Pennsylvania.

Corbett said that, as the GOP nominee for governor, he was interested in how the company operated its Pennsylvania gas fields.

"Anadarko is here in Pennsylvania," he said in an interview. "We're looking at their conduct in Pennsylvania."

Corbett, who faces Democratic nominee Dan Onorato in the Nov. 2 election, was in Chester County to take a tour of Bentley Systems Inc., an Exton company that produces software for infrastructure maintenance.

He told a gathering of employees that development of the Marcellus Shale deposits, which cover two-thirds of the state, could be key to Pennsylvania's future economy.

"We're sitting on top of Saudi Arabia when it comes to natural gas," he said.

The country that gave the world Al Qaeda?

The Marcellus Shale has the potential to produce 500,000 jobs, he said.

A study released by Common Cause Education Fund found that Corbett had received $361,207 in contributions from the natural gas industry as of March, compared with $59,300 for Onorato.

A special prosecutor has produced a confidential report after a court-ordered probe into alleged leaks of grand jury secrets during an investigation of former casino owner Louis DeNaples.

The investigation, ordered by the state Supreme Court, involved the questioning of four news reporters — one from The Morning Call — and has cost Dauphin County taxpayers $32,033. The grand jury operated in that county.

Dauphin County Judge Todd Hoover confirmed that a report was issued, Dauphin commissioners spokeswoman Amy Richards said. Hoover had looked into whether a special prosecutor was needed.

Hoover "did say that a report was prepared at the direction of the Supreme Court and it's sealed," Richards said. Hoover did not respond to a request for comment.

Francis T. Chardo, an assistant district attorney in Dauphin involved with the grand jury, said he hadn't heard "anything official" that the probe into alleged leaks had ended.

He had no further comment.

At the Supreme Court's direction, Hoover had studied whether a leak investigation was warranted, and he concluded it was not.

The high court ordered an investigation anyway. Dauphin County President Judge Richard Lewis in May 2009 appointed former York County Judge Albert G. Blakey as special prosecutor.

Blakey's law firm, Blakey, Yost, Bupp and Rausch of York, has billed Dauphin County $32,033 for the probe through June 3, county records show.

Richards was unable to answer when asked if the county commissioners would seek reimbursement for the cost of the investigation.

In January 2008, Dauphin County prosecutors charged DeNaples and a close friend, the Rev. Joseph Sica, with lying to a grand jury about their alleged relationship to an organized crime figure.

DeNaples' personal associations were under question because he had recently received a license to run Mount Airy Casino Resort in Monroe County.

The state licensing process took place in Dauphin County.

Several newspapers, including The Morning Call, reported about the existence of the grand jury.

Lawyers for DeNaples claimed that confidential testimony had been leaked to news reporters.

Hoover reviewed news accounts and in August 2008 concluded that no leaks had occurred.

The state's highest court, however, ordered the leak probe in early 2009.

Facts of the Case: In 1978, Curtis W. McGhee Jr. and Terry Harrington were convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment by an Iowa state court. In 2002, Mr. McGhee's and Mr. Harrington's convictions were reversed because the prosecutor at their trial improperly withheld evidence of an alternative suspect.

Subsequently, Mr. McGhee and Mr. Harrington filed civil claims in an Iowa federal court against Pottawattamie County, Iowa, and the prosecutors and officers involved in their prosecution.

The defendants moved for summary judgment arguing that they were absolutely immune to civil prosecution.

The district court found some defendants immune to certain claims, but denied immunity to other defendants on the other claims.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit granted interlocutory appeal on the question of whether the prosecutors were absolutely immune to civil prosecution.

The Eighth Circuit held that the prosecutors were not immune from claims that they violated Mr. McGhee's and Mr. Harrington's due process rights.

The court reasoned that allegations that prosecutors obtained, manufactured, coerced, and fabricated evidence did not fall within "a distinctly prosecutorial function" and thus the prosecutors were not immune to the claims.

Question: May a prosecutor be subject to civil prosecution when he allegedly violated the criminal defendants' substantial due process rights by fabricating evidence and then introducing it at trial against the defendants?

Former Solicitor General Paul Clement, now with the Washington office of Atlanta-based King & Spalding, took on McGhee and Harrington as clients after the Supreme Court agreed to hear the county's challenge of a lower court decision upholding their suit.

In oral arguments in November, it appeared Clement had gone a long way toward weakening the argument in favor of strict immunity for prosecutors, though the outcome was not entirely clear.

Some justices appeared concerned that prosecutors would become timid if they had to worry about being sued for their actions, while other justices seemed struck by the abuses perpetrated by the prosecutors in the case.

Despite their claims of innocence, the two men were convicted before an all-white jury and sentenced to long prison terms.

Decades later, they were able to obtain official files showing that police and prosecutors Dave Richter and Joe Hrvol coaxed the witness to implicate them, while ignoring evidence that pointed to the white suspect. The sole witness against the two men recanted his testimony.

The Iowa courts overturned their convictions five years ago. Harrington and McGhee then sued the county, prosecutors and police in federal court for violating their civil rights, alleging that the prosecutors knowingly used false testimony to convict them.

The prosecutors said they still believed Harrington and McGhee were guilty.

In the Supreme Court, a lawyer for the prosecutors agreed that police could be sued for fabricating evidence, but not prosecutors, even if they worked together.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said that was "a strange proposition."

Justice John Paul Stevens called it "perverse."

Facing a likely loss in the high court, the county moved to settle the case using taxpayers funds for the Prosecutors misconduct.

The non-profit Trial Lawyers College, where, per its mission statement, lawyers and judges "committed to the jury system" are trained to help achieve justice for individuals fighting "corporate and government oppression," particularly those individuals who could be described as "the poor, the injured, the forgotten, the voiceless, the defenseless and the damned.

Anonymous said...Wonder what Brett had for 4th of July inner?...probably a couple of "weiners", if you know what I mean. July 6, 2010 2:48 PM

You must be one of those closet Republicans from the Lg Cabin Club with such thoughts.

All you have to do is ask Tom Corbett's Campaign Fundraiser Robert Asher, he spent only a yera in a Prison for Bribery, Perjury, and far more charges than anything Brett Cott was convicted of and Asher knows all about Weiners!

Frankie was greedy and lazy and then cried for a job, them misled the HDC Leadership by hiring his relatives to do nothing, then became an informant and then went on his blog and blamed everyone but himself and is still making excuses.

Frank LaGrotta is the Poster Boy of what everything Legislator should avoid becoming and yet keep getting off no matter what he does and keeps blaming others.

Thanks to being close friends with Frank Dermody (OAG Tony Krastek Best Friend & Reed Smith Law Firm Patsy That Is A Part-Time Legislator By Missing Votes For Vacations) now in the HDC leadership due to Frankie Crimes is getting off again, when anyone else would lose their pension.

Yet, Brett Cott and Mike Veon are in jail today serving injustice long sentences due to the information provided by Frankie LaGrotta????

Read and Believe Judge Lewis Compassion Of Supporting More Crimes But Dumping On Veon & Cott:

Charges land ex-lawmaker back under house arrest:By: Marc LevyAssociated PressFriday July 9, 2010 01:04 PM

HARRISBURG — A former state lawmaker is back under house arrest after he was arrested in a prescription drug case while on probation for putting relatives in taxpayer-paid ghost jobs.

Frank LaGrotta received the new probation conditions on Friday in Dauphin County Court.

He pleaded guilty in 2008 to helping his sister and niece reap thousands of dollars for little or no work.

The former Lawrence County lawmaker received three years of probation in that case, including six months of house arrest.

Advertisement State prosecutors had asked Judge Richard Lewis to put LaGrotta in jail while he deals with the prescription drug charges.

Lewis opted for house arrest and weekly drug tests. He warned LaGrotta that another violation would result in jail time and he plans to reconsider LaGrotta’s sentence later.